Just a curiosity: I have purchased 2 tools in the past year that had a net
weight of about 400lbs. Both had gross weights specifies on the shipping
documents of over 500 lbs. There is no way that the packaging was more than
60 lbs in either case.
Is it common to just wild-ass guess and round up at the weight of a shipping
carton?
Has anyone else noticed that. I just find it odd.
-Steve
Hi Steve,
I know that for couriers they use a formula where the charge weight of a parcel
can be determined by it's volume. For example last week I shipped a parcel that
weighed 24 lb.. but when you determined the volume of the parcel and divide it
by 173 (a magic number) you get 31 so I was charged for 31 lb.. Maybe it is the
same for freight. Cheers, JG
C & S wrote:
> > How much over 500 pounds?
>
> 550 total about 75 lbs un accounted for.
>
> If it is near a break point on the rate, it may
> > be cheaper to ship it as 500 pounds at a low tariff that 499 pounds at the
> > higher tariff. This varies with classifications. I ship a lot of class
> 300
> > product and I can ship 1000 pounds cheaper by calling it 10,000 pounds at
> > class 100. Of course it is cheaper yet to ship a trailer.
> >
> > Freight costs are non-intuitive. Using an independent carrier through a
> > broker I shipped one pallet of material 70 miles at a cost of $250 and had
> > use of the entire trailer. New Penn rated it at $337.
>
> This stuff must be containerized comming from Asia, I have to belive that
> that part of the trip uses a volume-based pricing.
>
> Steve
"C & S" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Just a curiosity: I have purchased 2 tools in the past year that had a
> net
> weight of about 400lbs. Both had gross weights specifies on the shipping
> documents of over 500 lbs. There is no way that the packaging was more
> than
> 60 lbs in either case.
>
> Is it common to just wild-ass guess and round up at the weight of a
> shipping
> carton?
>
> Has anyone else noticed that. I just find it odd.
>
> -Steve
How much over 500 pounds? If it is near a break point on the rate, it may
be cheaper to ship it as 500 pounds at a low tariff that 499 pounds at the
higher tariff. This varies with classifications. I ship a lot of class 300
product and I can ship 1000 pounds cheaper by calling it 10,000 pounds at
class 100. Of course it is cheaper yet to ship a trailer.
Freight costs are non-intuitive. Using an independent carrier through a
broker I shipped one pallet of material 70 miles at a cost of $250 and had
use of the entire trailer. New Penn rated it at $337.
"JGS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi Steve,
> I know that for couriers they use a formula where the charge weight of a
> parcel
> can be determined by it's volume. For example last week I shipped a parcel
> that
> weighed 24 lb.. but when you determined the volume of the parcel and
> divide it
> by 173 (a magic number) you get 31 so I was charged for 31 lb.. Maybe it
> is the
> same for freight. Cheers, JG
Sort of. The parcel carriers like UPS, FedEx, use a dimensional weight that
corresponds to volume. With dimensional weight they don't car what you are
shipping.
Truckers use freight classifications. Remember the old joke, what weighs
more, a pound of feathers or a pound of bricks? While they may weigh the
same, on a bill of lading they would be classified as perhaps Class 300 for
the feathers, Class 25 for the bricks. That is the multiplier used to come
up wit the rate.
Most of what I ship is "Cellular expanded plastic articles with a density of
1 - 2 pcs NOIBN" and it is rated as class 300. That means I pay 3 times
something that is class 100, such as perhaps a piece of furniture. On a
truck, it takes about 3 times the space. An aluminum bench top saw would be
rated differently than a cast iron cabinet saw.
> How much over 500 pounds?
550 total about 75 lbs un accounted for.
If it is near a break point on the rate, it may
> be cheaper to ship it as 500 pounds at a low tariff that 499 pounds at the
> higher tariff. This varies with classifications. I ship a lot of class
300
> product and I can ship 1000 pounds cheaper by calling it 10,000 pounds at
> class 100. Of course it is cheaper yet to ship a trailer.
>
> Freight costs are non-intuitive. Using an independent carrier through a
> broker I shipped one pallet of material 70 miles at a cost of $250 and had
> use of the entire trailer. New Penn rated it at $337.
This stuff must be containerized comming from Asia, I have to belive that
that part of the trip uses a volume-based pricing.
Steve
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:00:26 -0500, "C & S"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Just a curiosity: I have purchased 2 tools in the past year that had a net
>weight of about 400lbs. Both had gross weights specifies on the shipping
>documents of over 500 lbs. There is no way that the packaging was more than
>60 lbs in either case.
>
>Is it common to just wild-ass guess and round up at the weight of a shipping
>carton?
>
>Has anyone else noticed that. I just find it odd.
>
>-Steve
>
i believe this to be true. not sure why . my delta bandsaw said 397
lbs. my drum sander also said 397 lbs. i gotta say there aint no way
in h##l the bandsaw weighs as much as the drum sander~!!!!! maybe
delta uses lead lined crates??? lol...
skeez
"C & S" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> This stuff must be containerized comming from Asia, I have to belive that
> that part of the trip uses a volume-based pricing.
>
> Steve
Sure it is. But then it breaks down to a truck at the distribution center.
There may have been a pallet when shipped from the distribution point to the
dealer or to the final buyer. In many cases, the imported merchandise has
the weights right on the cartons, often the volume.